I don’t know how tickets are still available for this show, but it looks like the entire city is sleeping on what I personally guarantee will be brukness incarnate.
Hell Hath No Fury was hip-hop’s most recent classic album, the wheels are back in motion, and if you don’t know, now you know.
I love writing because it frees my mind. When I write, I don’t have to hold onto my thoughts, because I can let them out and give them permanence. When I express my mind through writing, my thoughts also become refined and internalized on a deeper level. They become whole. This frees space for new thoughts and new ideas. No grasping at the pieces. No aerosol constellations. I just write down a piece of the puzzle and watch a few more flow into place. Writing makes my thoughts whole, and when I can express myself wholly, there is great creative satisfaction.
There is something similarly satisfying about photography, even though technically it is the exact opposite of writing. Writing can be a laborious process. Often there are notes, drafts, editing, grammar, flow, and it all takes a lot of time. Photography is instantaneous. In a fraction of a second you create something that expresses your perspective. But like writing, expressing yourself through photography requires practice and visual editing, and when you can express yourself wholly, that same creative satisfaction is there.
In a sense photography frees my mind in the same way writing does. When I write I am capturing something verbally. When I take a photograph I am capturing something visually. I see something, I refine it, and I attempt to give it meaning. Capturing a moment whole takes practice, and capturing it in my mind in addition to capturing it on paper or in a photo is the hardest part, but I hope it will become whole and meaningful on a deeper level regardless.
Not only do writing and photography free my mind internally, but they free my mind literally in the sense that when I express myself, others can see what I see. When I can express myself wholly, and other people have the opportunity to see what I see, there is great creative satisfaction.
Thanks to everyone who gave feedback on the thoughts in my previous post. As a token of my appreciation, I present you with a graph we can all agree on.
I’ve developed a theory about relationships. What you see above is a linear graph of gender. Not sex, which is definitively male/female, but culturally built gender. Overly simplistic examples of the extremes of masculine and feminine lie at each end. The center is androgyny, which I will not define as being neither male nor female, but rather as experiencing both the masculine and the feminine perspective. Thinking and feeling with complete impartiality.
My thesis, roughly put, is that the more equidistant two people in a relationship are from the center of the graph, the more “compatible” they are. Synced. Balanced. Harmonious.
Think beyond the conventional “He’s clean, I’m messy” implied meaning of the phrase “opposites attract,” and consider that statement in the context of gender. You do not attract because your habits are opposite of another person, but because you are equidistant from a midpoint on the most fundamental level, and as a result are balanced opposites of each other. These traits that balance each other run very deep, because they are embedded from our first moments, and I think they can have a correspondingly deep effect on the harmony of a relationship.
Why are people who are not equidistant from androgynous potentially less “compatible” than people who are? I haven’t fully figured that out, because this is a fresh thought, but as my one peer-reviewer succinctly put it, “Nobody likes to be reminded of what they are not.”
